Interestingly, there's a Wikipedia article on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children

That wiki doesn't describe anything related to using the phrase for evil.

The wording isn't as strong, but I think this paragraph explains a bit what GP is talking about:

> Ethicist Jack Marshall described "Think of the children!" as a tactic used in an attempt to end discussion by invoking an unanswerable argument.[2] According to Marshall, the strategy succeeds in preventing rational debate.[2] He called its use an unethical manner of obfuscating debate, misdirecting empathy towards an object which may not have been the focus of the original argument.[2] Marshall wrote that although the phrase's use may have a positive intention, it evokes irrationality when repeatedly used by both sides of a debate.[2] He concluded that the phrase can transform the observance of regulations into an ethical quandary, cautioning society to avoid using "Think of the children!" as a final argument.[2]

> called the use of the phrase "Think of the children" in debate a type of logical fallacy and an appeal to emotion.[1] According to the authors, a debater may use the phrase to emotionally sway members of the audience and avoid logical discussion.[1] They provide an example: "I know this national missile defense plan has its detractors, but won't someone please think of the children?"

See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalyp...

It is used for censorship plenty, for suppressing the disapproved without rational thought. There are 'ugly laws' on the books because of a bullshit misinterpretation of biblical passage that images seen by a pregnant mother could cause the child to be formed accordingly - never mind that the whole thing is essentially a miracle. Otherwise they wouldn't bother encoding 'common sense' livestock techniques in their holy books! They would leave it for their 'animal husbandry manuals'.

So now they have an excuse to get all of thus unsightly severely maimed Civil War Veterans reduced to begging out of the way. It isn't that we don't want to provide for them at all or have to look at them but it is for the children!

That bit of stupidity got left on the books until the 70s - mostly since it got forgotten until it came up as an excuse for the police to be dicks. Then there are the similar rationales of 'we have to discriminate against gays because they are all sexual predators'.

Definitely originated from The Simpsons:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RybNI0KB1bg

justifying the destruction of privacy to find out child molesters who look for their victims online. there are many examples like that.

99% of people would support destruction of privacy for this cause.

That is the problem.

Sorry, it's a not for evil. It's usually for government over reach and expansion of power and control. Children, terrorism, and drugs - they say we need to give up our rights for those things.